Assessing progress in data reporting by tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations
Kristina Heidrich | Jun 2022
New publication
Highlights
Published catch statistics and stock assessments by tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) do not meet the required standards set forth in RFMO mandates and conservation and management measures.
Highly taxonomically resolved catch data are lacking for vulnerable bycatch species such as sharks and rays and consequently compromise our understanding of the health of species and ecosystems.
Stock assessments for sharks, rays, and neritic tunas remain scarce, and available data are still highly uncertain and preliminary.
Spatially resolved catch data are essential for management, but we found that nearly half of the total catch reported in tuna RFMOs is not georeferenced.
Discard reporting (i.e. non-retained catch) in tuna RFMOs remains highly incomplete and not transparent to the public.
Tuna RFMOs need to substantially improve the provision of publicly available, comprehensive, and transparent catch data needs with an emphasis on vulnerably bycatch species such as sharks and rays, as well as neritic tunas and other teleosts (e.g. dolphinfishes)
Abstract
Tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) are responsible for conservation and sustainable management of transboundary tuna resources in Exclusive Economic Zones and Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ). The data collected and analyses performed by tuna RFMOs are one of the main sources of scientific information supporting the management, sustainable use, and conservation of biodiversity in the ABNJ. An understanding of the scope and availability of data provided by tuna RFMOs is timely, given the expected establishment of a new legally binding high seas agreement to protect marine biodiversity in the ABNJ. We examined official catch statistics and stock assessments that are accessible in the public domain for the five tuna RFMOs, and evaluated their taxonomic, spatial and temporal resolution. We found that the Atlantic and Indian Ocean tuna RFMOs report catches for a greater number of taxa compared to Pacific RFMOs. There are substantial gaps in the taxonomic resolution of sharks and rays and ‘other teleosts’, and only about half of the reported global catches are georeferenced, despite existing mandatory requirements. Additionally, the estimation and reporting of discards in all tuna RFMOs remain incomplete. Tuna RFMOs have made progress in implementing stock assessments for a wide range of taxa including targeted species with high economic value but also functionally important non-target species with lower economic value. However, assessments should be expanded to cover other bycatch species. We emphasize the importance of accessible and accurate statistics, for supporting the research and societal oversight needed under any future ABNJ biodiversity treaty.
Citation: Heidrich, KN, Juan-Jordá, MJ, Murua, H, Thompson, CDH, Meeuwig, JJ, Zeller, D (2022), Assessing progress in data reporting by tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations. Fish and Fisheries. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12687
01
RFMOs areas
All tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs) have specific areas of jurisdiction as defined by their conventions, except the Commission for the Conservation of the Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT). The CCSBT convention applies to only one species, the southern bluefin tuna – Thunnus maccoyii, throughout its range in the Southern Ocean. Convention areas can overlap between tuna RFMOs.
02
Reported catches
(a) all RFMOs, (b) International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), (c) Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), (d) Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), and (e) Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC). IATTC makes neritic tuna catches publicly available since 1964 but in quantities too small to be visible in the graph. WCPFC only makes catches of sharks and rays publicly available since 1996, and in quantities too small to be visible in the graph.
03
Taxonomic resolution
Taxonomic resolution of reported nominal catches by major taxonomic groups for each tuna RFMO (a-d) from 1950 to 2018. No data were available for the neritic tunas and other teleosts in the WCPFC public database
04
Stock assessments
Number of stock assessments carried out by tuna RFMO (oceanic tunas – light blue, neritic tunas – dark blue, billfishes – green, sharks – gold) from 1950 to 2018 for (a) all RFMOs, (b) International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT; 1966), (c) Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC; 1996), (d) Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC; 1949) and (e) Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC; 2004). Dashed vertical lines indicate the establishment of the Convention. The dashed line for the IATTC is not visible in the graph as the Convention was established in 1949.
05
Reporting requirements
Fully mandatory catch reporting requirements via logbooks or observer schemes are shown in green, while partial or non-mandatory catch reporting requirements are shown in red. Tickmarks and crosses indicate the inclusion of the taxa group within (tickmark) or outside (cross) RFMO convention mandates.
Funding and Acknowledgements
This research was supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program (RTP) Scholarship. Kristina Heidrich was also supported by the Forrest Research Foundation. Maria José Juan-Jordá was supported by “la Caixa” Foundation Postdoctoral Junior Leader Fellowship under agreement No 847648. General Sea Around Us research is supported by the Oak Foundation, the Paul M. Angell Family Foundation, the Marisla Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Minderoo Foundation and Bloomberg Philanthropies via Rare. However, no specific or dedicated funds were provided to support this specific research project. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the funding organisations as they had no involvement in the design or production of the study.